Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    August 8, 2010 3:30am-4:00am PST

4:30 am
structural system and -- cladding the building that carries the building out over adjacent streets by modest amounts. thirdly the building, which i mentioned has a train station below grade in this station as well, passes below the same street that the building passes above, freedmont and portions of the adjacent alleys and lastly the ramps to the terminal. i won't list them all but the major ones are harrison, folsom and howard streets. you have in your package showing all the areas proposed for vacation. i'll just put up a couple of graphics.
4:31 am
if i could have that overhead. this graphic shows both typical above and below grade vacations over the major streets such as first and freedmont. the above grade vacations do not begin below a point 18 feet above street grade so the function over the streets will not -- of the streets will not be affected. below grade for the train -- the vacation is proposed to start at a point. between a foot and a half and five feet, below grade, the site actually does slope from east to west. although the transit station is flat, the street does slope. extends down to the center of
4:32 am
the earth below the station. there are piles being driven down to build this so it does go down quite far. the other typical vacations, you can see, are much lesser. as you can see here, the building in the structural system in cladding extends about 15 feet out from the property line over the streets. again, not beginning below a point about 18 feet above street grade and extending out about 15 feet. it maintains distance from the adjacent buildings. lastly, the bus ramps, this is just a drawing showing the ramps. the structure is -- they are
4:33 am
requesting a vacation where it passes over the street for a purpose of maintaining the structure. and like all the other vacations, it begins at about 18 feet above grade. so the street, actually as we use the streets today from the sidewalk up, will not be affected. it will still remain in city jurisdiction. city property. it is the part below it has the being vacated. the planning department, and working with the city attorney, they agreed to a series of deed restrictions regarding these vacations, which are very notable. the first is that these street vacations in the property can only be used for the purpose of the transbay project including the associated ramps and rail
4:34 am
extension. the second tjpa cannot convey these vacated street portions to any other party except another government entity that may subsequently operate the transit center and lastly, that if any of these portion that are vacated, are ever sort of abandoned in terms of its use for the transit center for associated structures or for some reason, ever not built that this property automatically reverts back to city ownership. this is a unique structure generally when we vacate property, they are gone for good. so with that, i'm happy to answer any questions. the program manager is also here to answer any questions. the planning staff recommends that you find the proposed street vacations in conformity
4:35 am
with the general plan per the deed restrictions and other conditions that are included in the proposal. so happy to answer any questions. >> thank you. is there any public comment on this item? if not, public comment is closed. commissioner moore? commissioner moore: i assume they are all in line with the necessity to implement the terminal. one thing i have talked about is the ongoing involvement of the planning department with the terminal authority in order to continue to implement and safeguard the public ground as implementation of the street plan and they got back to me saying there is a memorandum or letter of understanding to that
4:36 am
effect that i believe i would like to see it for fully implemented because out of sight, out of mind. i have seen many projects go from conceptual design and move into scheme attic design and i'm speaking from the practical experience of seeing a building from design through construction. it is for this reason, as assignment goes by, i would like the planning department to stay the guardian of how the public ground is treated and how they assume stewardship, the ambitious plan will take years and years to implement but i believe the presence of the department in that department is very important. the other thing i'm concerned about, when we're talking about street scape and you now have below all of a these
4:37 am
requirements only five to six feet below the sidewalk, are you comfortable that your ideas about your sustainable street -- your rain guards and whatever they all are can be realized with giving it away in the way that you do? >> let me just clarify a couple of points. regarding the street scape. we are not vacating the portion of the street from basically from just below the grade to essentially 18 feet above grade. so any changes to the street scape, the sidewalks or the roadway, will still go through the same process that any street cape process and it will come through the planning department and other agencies and we have been working with them on any street scape components there.
4:38 am
the granth of vacations doesn't grant them any -- granting of vacations doesn't grant them any ability to make changes to the street scape on their own. in terms of the below grade train station, it says -- it does have a relative footprint in terms of the effect on the surrounding streets. it is an area immediately below the train stations. so those sidewalk portions are already essentially underneath the structure. so it has limited impact there because it probably would have had limited landscaping underneath the building. on the adjacent alleys it does extend about 15 feet or so into the street. there is, you know, in that case, trees have to be planted in planters above grade and we are working with them on that.
4:39 am
but again, it is sort of one side of the street on two alleys for about a block. so i think we will be able to -- a very robust -- on these areas and we're working on that. >> i would just add to what josh said that we have been continuing to work closely with the planning department staff and the development staff and a loft street scape improvements that were planning around the transit center in conjunction with the project reflect the redevelopment agency's scape plan for the transit center redevelopment area, which of course, reflected and built upon the rincon hill street scape plan so we are endeavoring to recognize the work that has gone ahead of us and how those two
4:40 am
neighborhoods relate to one another but also how some of the prominent streets that are planned, for instance, beale street and main street relate to market street. we are definitely continuing to consult and will continue to consult with the planning department and the redevelopment agency to make sure that what we're doing in the public realm relates well to the surrounding neighborhood. commissioner moore: thank you. appreciate your comment. would you be comfortable if there is a formalized comment in this acknowledgment that would indeed kind of like guarantee the ongoing direct involvement of the department? that would be my level of comfort. it is not a distrust but i know when the technical world comes down, many other things kind of get forgotten. >> yeah, i think -- we are
4:41 am
involved because the surface of the street will not go over -- they will still be city streets on the surface so we would have to be involved just the way we normally are. we can look at them and i think the bigger point is we need to continue our involvement. commissioner moore: that it is done in a matter that would express -- >> absolutely. with respect, i think your question was about the depth of soil that one has left for landscaping. i think the areas where that depth is limited are pretty small areas. we're working to make sure that happens. there are some areas where there will be a minimal depth that you couldn't have trees but those are only a couple of blocks in the alleys. i'm definitely committed, especially with the better streets planned and all that,
4:42 am
the transit center plans to make sure that we stay involved in this in the public ground work. >> if i might add, the areas around the transit center, of course security of the perimeter is of significant concern with a facility like this and as part of that, even though greater levels would be essentially below grade, we are looking another using boxes and beds as part of the -- as opposed to just continuous roll of -- so we're definitely looking at the public realm and more amenable ways of addressing that both from a design as well as a security perspective. >> i'm talking about the storm
4:43 am
water management issue, which comes into play and then the new street scape design and hope that you find an interface between the more engineered way how they need to be treated and what they are proposing. >> as it relates to that as well, of course you're aware the roof of the transit center, the design of our facility is going to reduce the storm water runoff from its current level so we are doing a significant amount both with the facility itself and then we'll try and also reflect that at the street scape level. >> thank you. is there any public comment on this item? if not, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i like the design because unlike the present situation, it lets a lot
4:44 am
more light and air into the area surrounding the transbay terminal. although design can only do part of it and certainly enforcement is going to be important and we hope it doesn't end up like the current transbay terminal after several million dollars. my question relates to the connection between bart and the metro at the present terminal. i understand there is a plan to have a way to go to bart. i would hope there is. i'm not sure it is part of this report but it should be there because even in 1939 or whenever we had our first transbay terminal, the one that is being torn down, we had street cars come right up to the terminal so if someone is taking barter muni they should be able to access
4:45 am
the trains and the buses, you made comment on that, i don't know if that is part of today's presentation or not. >> there is not a vacation in this package that would relate to a barton muni connector. that is something that was included on our original document as an alternate program element and something we're continuing to discuss with bart. we kind of developed it to the extent that we have identified that a connection -- because between midway, slightly close to embarcadero. we have identified it as a more logical connection, slightly shorter and has conflicts with underground facilitateds between us and montgomery station. but that would be part of the
4:46 am
rail component of the program if we implement that. we've also been having, as i mentioned, quite a bit of conversation with bart, and one of the concerns that they have is people using that as a connection to get north of market street but not actually transfering to bart or muni and the congestion that might add to the bart -- embarcadero station. we're also discussing some ways we might address that, whether it is the use of a car and the person did in fact transfer or some other means but we were having ongoing conversations about that. >> take a trip to new york. they got a number of those connections underground. i know you're not -- there may be ways to monitor that but i'm sure there will be to make sure that most of your people using it are actually utilizing bart
4:47 am
but there is a couple of major ones between grand central and i think where the other is, probably about a quarter of a mile and you need to have the moving stairways and stuff for people too along there. let's hope that that can get done because i think it would be a big oversight if it isn't there. >> certainly when you think trying to transfer, with baggage and things, it would be a much more convenient connection. >> i would hope there would also be a view towards some and this is in the far future, but if there is some connection to the north bay that cops across san francisco, i mean, -- comes across san francisco, i mean, getting that connected, rather than clogging up the city with the buses, as is usually the case, we may be able to put that underground and that would make a lot of sense. thank you. >> commissioner lee?
4:48 am
>> he was a deputy director of d.p.w. for many years and then took job on the transbay terminal. if you have questions, and also call mr. beck. with that i want to move that we approve. second. commissioner moore: i would ask that the director help us formulate a -- to my asking for the department stay involved in a formalized way, not just some casual letter of memorandum, understanding as people move along in this 20-year project, out of sight, out of mind, i would like to see a formalized relationship. >> we can add that to it. >> i just want to make sure in
4:49 am
this type of thing we can add a condition to the action. >> let me ask mr. beck. don't we have some sort of more mallized agreement with the city and the trans-- formalized agreement with the city on the transbay? >> it does put most of the planning review or planning approval underneath the redevelopment agency but we had discuss, you know, a formal agreement between the director, you know, committing to quarterly consultations or what have you and we could execute something like that. >> i guess the only question for me is whether that becomes a part of this action or something
4:50 am
separate. i just want to understand the legal impolice carations of that. >> this resolution really doesn't have conditions attached it to but it may be useful to put something in the findings portion of the resolution possibly in the section on the urban design element that the planning department would be -- would continue to be involved in the review process and fund. we could add a sentence and i just want to be clear that that is what the commission wants to add into this amendment. that the planning department and the planning commission or the -- >> the planning, the planning department. the physical design capabilities for that level of input is in the planning department. if they want to come back and report to us, it would be nice but that is not really the
4:51 am
reason why i'm saying this. >> so the finding would include, then, a statement that the department will continue to be involved with the -- >> continue to monitor. >> continue to monitor and oversee the public realm design and improvements. over time. >> ok. commissioner moore: did the findings not necessarily as strong -- >> just because these are still -- these will still be public streets, we will be involved anyway. commissioner moore: ok. >> and if the commission could separately have me direct a letter. commissioner moore: i think you can write an explanation to them to start a more complieget way of going about it but i think --
4:52 am
collegiate way but i think i would like to formalize. >> with an amendment to findings that would include an urban design element that the planning department will continue to be involved in the public realm design and improvement over time and that to that extent, the director will send a letter. on that motion -- [roll call vote] thank you, commissioners. the that motion passed unanimously. commissioners, you are now on item 13, 2010.0438 c. >> this is to place a karaoke machine at a restaurant and bar
4:53 am
occupying two floors at 1268 grant avenue in the north beach commercial district. the business was approved as two floors with 4,000 square feet for conditional use in 1987. they would locate a karaoke machine to the right of the bar. the request is for the karaoke machine only and any other form of entertainment would need to be approved by the commission under a new request. the project does not include any changes to the second familiar. the police department opposes this request. they are concerned about the restaurant/bar trying to evolve into a nightclub and the noise and activities involved with such a use. the department has also received emails from hill dwellers in opposition because they are concerned it will become a nightclub.
4:54 am
13 letters of support from businesses, a veteran's group and residents in the area have also been received. the neighborhood is also concerned about the amount of signage that cover much of the window area. the department is recommending conditions be imposed that will lessen the chance that it become a nuisance, including silenting at midnight, restrictions on noise and window signs. it was approved by the entertainment commission in february of this year without conditions. restrictions on window signage, noise and hours of use for electronic amplification. i'll be happy to answer any questions. thank you very much. >> thank you. project sponsor?
4:55 am
>> my name is marcia garland. i'm with garland public and community relations. good evening, everybody. he bought his building in twen for $3.-- in 2007 for $3.9 million. he employees a lot of people. he pays a lot of taxes and he is proud of his culinaryy accomplishments. i think there were like 600 or 700 congressmens, most of which were favorable. -- comments, most of which were favorable. also he received a readers poll,
4:56 am
lots of other accolades. but when he started his business, he had a business model in mind and the model didn't work for him and he was beginning to see his investment dollars going south. so at that time, he started to -- he had a place -- this building is very historic. i'll just show you a picture of it. for those of you who know the area, this area here used to be the famous la pantera. the buildings were combined. that is the existing footprint. so the bar is actually in this portion. it looks like two separate store
4:57 am
fronts. he originally had a place called the manchester which was for his favorite soccer team. that didn't work so he kept modifying his system. when he started to apply for the entertainment permits, he also, at the same time, went ahead and lowered his price to $2 for domestic beer and $5 for many of the plates on the menu. i have eaten there many times. it is an outstanding bargain. now, a lot of people -- let me explain karaoke. first of all, i grew up in england as most of you know. every sunday we didn't have a television. every sunday we would stand around the piano and have family sing-song. we did broadway teams. made absolute bloody fools of ourselves but it was fun. it was family entertainment.
4:58 am
along comes karaoke. i first came across it about 25 years ago and thought it was stupid. anyway, it has come back again and has become a very important part of the asian community. it has replaced our family sing-songs. asians typically do not drink a lot and so they go and get a microphone passed around and act silly, sing songs and pretend they are queen latifah for the night. this karaoke set that he has in mind is just like the kind you would have in your living room. they tell us everybody doesn't like his signage. they think it is low class. ok. the u.s. restaurant, a famous italian restaurant. show the signs. daily specials. i don't know what that sign is.
4:59 am
it is not even sicilian. should be. here we have the philadelphia cheese steak company. there is even a pose poster with a smokinggun on it. that is philly cheesesteaks. then we have the italian butcher. full of signage. how to make vale saute. what kind of -- veal saute. what kind of ingredients go into their sausages. so i have come to know with north beach, especially, we have what i like to call the taste police. i really think that's what this boils down to. the taste police coming along saying they don't like what he does. thank you very much.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on